Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Final Charter

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Never occurred to me to consider it an obfuscation.,  What did I miss?

Does seem like a hard work item to understand.  
Are they supposed to determine the truth value of the statement?
In any case, thanks. I will pas the questions on to the NCSG g-council members.

avri


On 9 Oct 2012, at 22:02, Alan Greenberg wrote:

> 
> I read the question as being in relation to the statement "it COULD be 
> beneficial" - is it rally beneficial or not?
> 
> The previous bullet on response consistency is phrased the same way - no 
> question mark but an implied question by not saying it WOULD be beneficial.
> 
> Perhaps not the clearest possible formulation, but I don't see is as 
> obfuscation either, so I can live with it.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 09/10/2012 09:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Apologies for missing the meeting - just read the email now about the 
>> meeting (wish we have a importable calendar of all WG and DT meetings like 
>> AT-Large does).
>> 
>> In an case, read the final proposal and I have a question.  If it is too 
>> late for them in this DT, then I will ask a NCSG g-council member to ask.
>> 
>> In the second bullet of the Mission, "-stability':  is there a question in 
>> that?  It seems rather declarative and I was wondering if it contained any 
>> element of a work item or is it just a declaration of 'fact'
>> 
>> Otherwise it seems fine.
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8 Oct 2012, at 15:08, Marika Konings wrote:
>> 
>> > Dear All,
>> >
>> > For your information, please find attached the final version of the 
>> > proposed charter which will be submitted to the GNSO Council as per the 
>> > DT's meeting today.
>> >
>> > With best regards,
>> >
>> > Marika
>> > <Thick Whois Charter - Final - 8 October 2012.doc>
> 
>